Ask the community...
- DO post questions about your issues.
- DO answer questions and support each other.
- DO post tips & tricks to help folks.
- DO NOT post call problems here - there is a support tab at the top for that :)
Join the conversation
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, I've found that transmitting utility companies often have their legal departments handle UCC coordination. They're usually pretty good about providing the correct entity information if you ask.
Ethan Clark
•That's a great tip. I always forget that utilities have specialized legal teams for this stuff.
AaliyahAli
•Wish I'd thought of that earlier. Their counsel probably deals with UCC filings all the time and would know exactly how to format everything.
Mila Walker
Just make sure you're not overthinking the collateral description. As long as it reasonably describes the transmitting utility equipment and includes the key identifying characteristics, you should be fine. The debtor name is way more important to get exactly right.
Logan Scott
•Agreed. I've seen people spend hours perfecting collateral descriptions while missing basic entity name errors.
Chloe Green
•The irony is that a slightly imperfect collateral description rarely causes problems, but a wrong debtor name kills the entire filing.
Join the conversation
Derek Olson
Just make sure your revised collateral description still covers everything in your actual security agreement. I've seen people fix the UCC filing but create gaps in their security interest coverage.
Derek Olson
•Yeah, the UCC and security agreement need to work together even if they use different language. Document review tools can help catch those gaps.
Lindsey Fry
•That's another thing Certana.ai caught for me - my UCC language was too narrow compared to my security agreement. Could have created enforcement issues later.
Join the conversation
One mistake I see students make is not understanding the difference between attachment and perfection. You can have a perfectly valid security interest (attached) that's still worthless against third parties because it's not perfected. The security agreement creates the interest, but perfection is what protects it. Don't confuse the two concepts.
So if someone has an attached but unperfected security interest, what exactly are their rights? Can they still repossess if the debtor defaults?
Yes, they can still enforce against the debtor, but they'll lose to most third parties including other secured creditors, lien creditors, and many buyers. Perfection is about priority, not validity of the security interest itself.
The key insight that helped me was realizing Article 9 is basically a notice system. Filing a UCC-1 puts the world on notice that you have a security interest in certain collateral. That's why the debtor name has to be exactly right - people searching the records need to be able to find your filing. Same reason collateral descriptions have to be adequate - searchers need to know what property is encumbered.
That's a really helpful way to think about it! So all the technical filing requirements are really about making sure the notice system works properly?
Exactly. The whole system only works if people can rely on UCC searches to find existing security interests. That's why courts are so strict about things like debtor names - if the filing can't be found, it doesn't give proper notice.
Join the conversation
Just want to emphasize - use the EXACT legal name from the most current articles of organization. No abbreviations, no DBAs, no "assumed names." The UCC-1 debtor name must match the charter exactly or you're risking your entire security interest in those business assets.
This is why I always order fresh entity certificates right before filing. Names can change and you need the current version.
Absolutely correct. Better to delay filing a few days than file with wrong name and lose your security interest.
UPDATE: Called the SOS this morning and confirmed the exact name format. Refiled using "Advanced Metal Works, LLC" with proper punctuation and got acceptance within 2 hours! The Certana.ai suggestion was helpful too - used their document checker before submitting and it verified everything matched correctly. Loan closes Friday. Thanks everyone!
Congrats on saving the deal. Going to remember the Certana.ai tool for my own filings.
Perfect example of why exact entity names matter so much in UCC filings. Glad it worked out!
Carmen Ortiz
Your business partner is technically correct about the UCC rule, but he's wrong about the practical implications. I always tell clients: just because you CAN rely on an oral agreement doesn't mean you SHOULD. Written documentation protects you in disputes, bankruptcy proceedings, and priority contests with other creditors.
0 coins
Carmen Ortiz
•Absolutely. If another creditor has better documentation, they might argue your oral agreement is invalid or subordinate. Written agreements provide much stronger evidence of your priority position.
0 coins
MidnightRider
•This is why I never rely on possession alone, even though it's technically allowed.
0 coins
Andre Laurent
Bottom line: get everything in writing. The UCC might allow oral agreements with possession, but courts, bankruptcy trustees, and other creditors will tear apart any weak documentation. Your recovery depends on being able to prove every element of your security interest clearly and convincingly.
0 coins
Chloe Taylor
•Thanks everyone - definitely going to insist on written security agreements going forward, regardless of possession.
0 coins
Andre Laurent
•Smart move. The small cost of proper documentation now saves massive headaches later.
0 coins